alloverthat wrote:For those applying this cycle: do you all have the other bits of your app together yet? E.g LOR's, sent transcript to LSAC etc

I haven't even thought about any of this yet. Worried that since my UG is international it'll all take even longer than usual.

I have my LORs and transcripts complete, still need to write my PS. Note that it can take a long time for foreign undergrad records to be processed - excluding the time wasted by the institution, it took me about two months from the moment my records were mailed. But someone else in the international applicants thread reported that LSAC processed his records in 8 business days (for me it was more like 20).

As to LSAT prep, I'm gonna take PT67 today (have 68/69 planned for next weekend, and 70/71 for the weekend after).

diiggidy wrote:By 100% I meant that over the last 8 PTs I've taken, I haven't missed any MC, Method, Parallel Reasoning etc. So basically your advice is to keep going over the assumption family questions so I can more easily see the flaws and pick out the trap answers?

If the assumption family Qs are what you're missing on LR, then yeah that could be helpful for you. Kind of depends on why you're missing the Qs but IMHO the most important thing on assumption fam Qs is having a very strong grasp on the argument core (premise, conclusion, flaw) and being able to recognize which ACs are outside the scope of the argument/can be accounted for by the argument. IMO on the more recent tests wrong ACs get trickier so it's really helpful to be vale to eliminate those wrong ACs

Generally, I would be happy with the score and a -2 per section average, but I think that's too tight of a margin to be walking this close to the test. I don't know how, but I need to find more time for drilling (LR in particular) to stay sharp. I've been really struggling through the LR Difficulty packet.

I started this PT midday after lounging around all day. This is the last time I do that- I was so unfocused during the LR sections. My 2nd best LG score was encouraging but it felt pretty easy comparitively to other tests.

Generally, I would be happy with the score and a -2 per section average, but I think that's too tight of a margin to be walking this close to the test. I don't know how, but I need to find more time for drilling (LR in particular) to stay sharp. I've been really struggling through the LR Difficulty packet.

Generally, I would be happy with the score and a -2 per section average, but I think that's too tight of a margin to be walking this close to the test. I don't know how, but I need to find more time for drilling (LR in particular) to stay sharp. I've been really struggling through the LR Difficulty packet.

BillPackets wrote:Well when you get into the post 16 range the Qs get more difficult.

You should def see if u can find some sort of pattern w the strengthen/weaken. Did u do all the drilling packets ?

All as in every one of Cambridge's? No. I have this massive Kaplan tome that sorts by question types, and I also have every single test from 1-55, so I haven't felt the need. I've been only using Cambridge for my weakest areas: Strengthen, Weaken, Parallel Reasoning.

I'm real curious about your issues w strengthen/weaken. Sometimes I think it's helpful to take any assumption family Q (flaw, NA, SA, etc) and write out potential answers to every type of assumption family Q. So write down weakeners, strengtheners, NAs, SAs, flaw(s). I know that helped me really see how each type of assumption family Q turns on one another. Sometimes the correct answer choices in Strengthen Qs sound a whole lot like NA.

I always thought that the first 11 were mostly easy some medium, 12-20 or 21 were hard, and the last few were medium.. I even make a notation on my bubble sheet not to overlook anything when I start getting in the double digits. Buckle down.

ilikebaseball wrote:I always thought that the first 11 were mostly easy some medium, 12-20 or 21 were hard, and the last few were medium.. I even make a notation on my bubble sheet not to overlook anything when I start getting in the double digits. Buckle down.

I usually notice from 21-25 or so there is one or two really difficult ones.

It was kind of exciting to take a PT at the test center and I think that kinda helped me stay focused the whole time. The 2nd LR felt tougher than the first (some tricky answer choices) but I felt good about both. The fourth game was a beast compared to the first three but still very manageable if I hadn't wasted so much time right when I got to it.

Good Job! Took this test yesterday, can I have your LR and LG score please thanks. Also I know that you had a study partner, did that work out for you?

lol thank you! yes, June had a nice group of about 4-5. we were all following the same PT schedule so we'd review together on Skype every week. I do think it helped a lot-- we kept each other on track. It's important to not let group review replace individual review, though.

ilikebaseball wrote:I really want LG to be my experimental. I feel like i conserve a lot of energy and whenever I see an LG my mind almost takes a break.

OMG YES PLEASE. I feel like Experimentals are often LR? Is this true?

I feel like its a crapshoot. Obviously, there are more types of questions to experiment with LR, so there might be something to that theory. Games you have 4, RC you have 4, but LR you have 25, so there is sort of a larger sample

Idk. For whatever reason, I usually breeze through 22-25. I feel like LSAC puts the difficult ones in the mid-late teens just so most people have a time crunch by the time they get to the easier ones at the end. I might be wrong though. I guess a question is only as hard as YOU perceive it

ilikebaseball wrote:I always thought that the first 11 were mostly easy some medium, 12-20 or 21 were hard, and the last few were medium.. I even make a notation on my bubble sheet not to overlook anything when I start getting in the double digits. Buckle down.

In the MLSAT book they have it broken down where the toughest Qs appear...peer them 1-10 are def the easiest, 11-15 still kinda easy, then like 16-20 range is usually the hardest appear. My goal on LR is usually to go -0 thru the first 15

I don't understand it because on the Oct 2013 LSAT I took I went -4 combined on LR - less than either RC or LG individually. I think the issue is that I haven't really improved on LR. I haven't really developed any skills or techinques to beat it. I typically just go with the answer that "sounds" best, and I typically have a good sense of it. Thinking about hitting the Manhattan LSAT LR book hard this afternoon.

I don't understand it because on the Oct 2013 LSAT I took I went -4 combined on LR - less than either RC or LG individually. I think the issue is that I haven't really improved on LR. I haven't really developed any skills or techinques to beat it. I typically just go with the answer that "sounds" best, and I typically have a good sense of it. Thinking about hitting the Manhattan LSAT LR book hard this afternoon.

ilikebaseball wrote:I always thought that the first 11 were mostly easy some medium, 12-20 or 21 were hard, and the last few were medium.. I even make a notation on my bubble sheet not to overlook anything when I start getting in the double digits. Buckle down.

In the MLSAT book they have it broken down where the toughest Qs appear...peer them 1-10 are def the easiest, 11-15 still kinda easy, then like 16-20 range is usually the hardest appear. My goal on LR is usually to go -0 thru the first 15

ilikebaseball wrote:I always thought that the first 11 were mostly easy some medium, 12-20 or 21 were hard, and the last few were medium.. I even make a notation on my bubble sheet not to overlook anything when I start getting in the double digits. Buckle down.

In the MLSAT book they have it broken down where the toughest Qs appear...peer them 1-10 are def the easiest, 11-15 still kinda easy, then like 16-20 range is usually the hardest appear. My goal on LR is usually to go -0 thru the first 15

ilikebaseball wrote:I always thought that the first 11 were mostly easy some medium, 12-20 or 21 were hard, and the last few were medium.. I even make a notation on my bubble sheet not to overlook anything when I start getting in the double digits. Buckle down.

In the MLSAT book they have it broken down where the toughest Qs appear...peer them 1-10 are def the easiest, 11-15 still kinda easy, then like 16-20 range is usually the hardest appear. My goal on LR is usually to go -0 thru the first 15

My goal is to got -0 throug the first 25 or 26.

LOLOLOL.

WorldsCollide wrote:Just got -2 on LR1. Suffice it to say, I was ecstatic. (even though all of you are aiming for a -0!)